or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line - Page 9

post #321 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Because glare iMacs are the only thing offered- Are you that dense?


Which means that glare is obviously NOT a deal breaker .. are you that dense?
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #322 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Well I might have bought one if there had been matte offered- so yes, you can consider that as one more sold.


Damn, we lost teckdud ... guess it's time to start shorting Apple stock for sure, now!
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #323 of 486
Quote:
Taking exception to the processor and other issues raised here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by addabox

Well, the marketing angle is certainly reasonable, but we don't really know that the next iMac refresh is going to be purely cosmetic.

I think what most people here are saying is that the next iMac had damn well be more than a cosmetic upgrade. As much as Apple would like to you can't market around the facts to the majority of the people.

Quote:

It will almost certainly feature some kind of CPU boost, plus the usual upticks in ram and hard drive space, plus possible some hardware revisions we don't know about.
Which would not be good enough. In my case it would force me to not reccomend the iMac to anyone.

Quote:

Again, the value proposition for a potential buyer is a whole bunch of interrelated elements, not just "does it have the latest CPU", which I submit is fairly low on the list.

Then simply put you are wrong. The CPU is the biggest shortcoming in the iMac and I would put forth is the most important element on the list that informed shoppers use. An i7 derived or like processor is really what Snow Leopard was built for.

Except for the possibility on the lowest end machines I can't see dual core in Apples machines as being even remotely viable for leveraging SL. SL and GCD are meant to exploit highly parallel machines supporting many threads. Without quad cores and more the ability to leverage those new features is extremely limited. Frankly the development effort that went into SL indicates that Apple sees these parallel machines as it's near term future. So if you want to buy into this new world order you need to expect a minimal of 4 hardware threads.


Dave

Dave, at times, seems to be one of the few sane, balanced and reasonable non-'kool-aid' people on here at times.

He's right. It's amazing that people would side with Apple to say that the cpu isn't important...because (pick insane argument to fill in blank.)

And I do agree with Dave that the direction of Snow Leopard should be ample reason enough to warrant a quad core iMac. Or the fact that the rest of the 'sane' PC World have had consumer quad cores for how long now? And at cheap prices? And i7 class hardware that blows the mini, iMac and Mac Pro out the water for value for money.

Nice OS, sexy cases...poor value, out of date specs and bad value for the consumer. ie out of date hardware for the consumer desktop space.

Let alone the fact that i7 is a chip that clock for clock beats the snot out of the Core out of date Duo, it's equipped for the future, better performing and costs way less than the craptop parts Apple is using. Stubborn. Arrogance. Blind dogma. A lack of choice. Take yer pick.

I thought it would be inconceivable with the move to Intel that we would see hardware costing twice as much for out of date desktop parts. It's just like the PPC days again. But worse given the context of Inteldom.

Here's hoping the next iMac revision doesn't suck like that last two revisions which basically, in the words of Woody Allen, '98% of dancing is just turning up.'

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #324 of 486
The iMac not only needs quad cores to remain competitive, pricing needs to be lower, too.

If people are looking for LED-backlighting in the next iteration I don't know how that's going to mesh with lower pricing.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #325 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post

The iMac not only needs quad cores to remain competitive, pricing needs to be lower, too.

If people are looking for LED-backlighting in the next iteration I don't know how that's going to mesh with lower pricing.

You could see the line split into iMac and iMac Pro.
post #326 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

You could see the line split into iMac and iMac Pro.

Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.

How about the iMac Plus?
post #327 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.

How about the iMac Plus?

How about "iMac S"
(S=Speed)
post #328 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.

How about the iMac Plus?

The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable case (similar to the MacPros and the original G5 iMac) and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.
post #329 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

... A user upgradable base...

Huh? What would you upgrade the base to? Or why?

EDIT: Oh, you mean the base RAM, not the stand, duh!
post #330 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable base and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.

Hmm, speaking as a tech-geek, I think it's a great idea, but I don't see Apple doing that.
post #331 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Huh? What would you upgrade the base to? Or why?

EDIT: Oh, you mean the base RAM, not the stand, duh!

I hit the b instead of the c.
post #332 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

I hit the b instead of the c.

ah, case, exactly.
post #333 of 486
It's obvious that the next update is major, so nobody expects the unveiling without a media event.

So tomorrow's an impossibility. Given that Apple generally gives 5-7 days notice, next week Tuesday looks pretty iffy as well. Rumors of an event would already be flying.

There are only three other Tuesdays left. I say October 20th. Where the poll?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #334 of 486
Apple store is down.

post #335 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

Apple store is down.


Must have been routine maintenance............It is back up now and I don;t see anything "new"....

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #336 of 486
If it goes down in the evening, I can almost guarantee its maintenance related and probably to fix something unexpected.
post #337 of 486
It's 3:20am. That's quite a lot of downtime for something "maintenance-related" to be fixed.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #338 of 486
No idea what are you talking about but both the Us and Australian Apple site + the store are working OK and have been for the last couple hours so no panic needed...
post #339 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If you're using a high end video program like Motion or other heavily GPU'd app, then you should also be able to afford a Mac Pro.

I can't see your logic mel...we buy iMacs to do low-end SD video and audio editing in FCS and Protools LE (moving to Logic someday maybe). They are great for that, as well as for 3D composition, however, we need to farm the rendering out to mac pros to keep things from getting bogged down. If iMacs had just a bit more oomph in all areas, we could use those for most work - and then just use mac pros for specialized applications only, like Protools HD and 10-bit HD video conversions/re compressions that require hardware. We have saved thousands of $$$ by using iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
[CENTER] Small A/V Studio in Kathmandu Nepal 
[/CENTER]
Reply
[CENTER] Small A/V Studio in Kathmandu Nepal 
[/CENTER]
Reply
post #340 of 486
This thread provides some interesting perspective, as well as some humor. It's obvious that Apple will never get the iMac "right" by the tech crowd. Of course, a 6 year old could understand why when you tell them its not made for the tech crowd, but unlike a 6 year old, techie adults ignore you when you tell them the truth.

I'm as techy and as semi-professional as it gets, and yes I find the iMac to be a bit sluggish. And yet, its still faster than all of the Apple Laptops including the top of the line Pro, so its really all relative, with a bit of circular logic thrown in.

The iMac is and will continue to be the piece of sex that can be dropped on anyones desk and its all the computer they'll ever need.

If you're doing lots of encodes and re-encodes, and large file edits and saves, well your life sucks because you're going to need to spend more than the avg joe on RAM and disk space, and likely need a Mac Pro model in the end anyway.
post #341 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

This thread provides some interesting perspective, as well as some humor. It's obvious that Apple will never get the iMac "right" by the tech crowd. Of course, a 6 year old could understand why when you tell them its not made for the tech crowd, but unlike a 6 year old, techie adults ignore you when you tell them the truth.

I'm as techy and as semi-professional as it gets, and yes I find the iMac to be a bit sluggish. And yet, its still faster than all of the Apple Laptops including the top of the line Pro, so its really all relative, with a bit of circular logic thrown in.

The iMac is and will continue to be the piece of sex that can be dropped on anyones desk and its all the computer they'll ever need.

If you're doing lots of encodes and re-encodes, and large file edits and saves, well your life sucks because you're going to need to spend more than the avg joe on RAM and disk space, and likely need a Mac Pro model in the end anyway.

I don't think the iMac is made for any particular 'crowd'. There are things to love and hate in any Mac, but I think most here are Apple fans. They are just voicing their likes and dislikes. Your 'truth' as you call is is your opinion just as the 'I Want' posts in here are just opinions. An important distinction to remember.

You're implying that the 'techies' are somehow less important than the 'don't cares', or the 'imac is art' groups. They all make up the same Apple fans and they are all Apple consumers.

Try to remember that
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #342 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

This thread provides some interesting perspective, as well as some humor. It's obvious that Apple will never get the iMac "right" by the tech crowd. Of course, a 6 year old could understand why when you tell them its not made for the tech crowd, but unlike a 6 year old, techie adults ignore you when you tell them the truth.

I'm as techy and as semi-professional as it gets, and yes I find the iMac to be a bit sluggish. And yet, its still faster than all of the Apple Laptops including the top of the line Pro, so its really all relative, with a bit of circular logic thrown in.

The iMac is and will continue to be the piece of sex that can be dropped on anyones desk and its all the computer they'll ever need.

If you're doing lots of encodes and re-encodes, and large file edits and saves, well your life sucks because you're going to need to spend more than the avg joe on RAM and disk space, and likely need a Mac Pro model in the end anyway.

We know who the iMac is made for. However, the Mac Pro has gone up in price $1000 in the past half decade and despite what some Mac users may think, money doesn't grow on trees and a Mac isn't your only expensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I don't think the iMac is made for any particular 'crowd'. There are things to love and hate in any Mac, but I think most here are Apple fans. They are just voicing their likes and dislikes. Your 'truth' as you call is is your opinion just as the 'I Want' posts in here are just opinions. An important distinction to remember.

You're implying that the 'techies' are somehow less important than the 'don't cares', or the 'imac is art' groups. They all make up the same Apple fans and they are all Apple consumers.

Try to remember that

They're less important to Apple (despite being the main reason they survived long enough to make the current products.) They prefer substance, Apple prefers style.
post #343 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by matejay View Post

No idea what are you talking about but both the Us and Australian Apple site + the store are working OK and have been for the last couple hours so no panic needed...

The US and Canadian stores were defintely down for much of last night.

Apparently to add the all new Bento 3?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #344 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

I agree with Steve, Blu Ray is expensive and kinda useless on a computer.

First off, most programs still fit nicely on a DVD.

Second you would need a much larger then 24' display for blu ray to be useful, and for that you would need a TV, not an iMac.

Third making iMacs more expensive right now is not a very good move, the economy is not good enough to support a price increase right now.

Therefore if blu ray does come about it would have to be an option for the most expensive iMac in the family. Just my prediction.

Um... except that the Mac community is largely made of creative pros and many of them use their macs to professionally author video. Unless folks have been living under a rock the last few years, Blu Ray is a major distribution format for video.

Therefore, Blu Ray makes abundant sense for computers.
post #345 of 486
I can very easily see the C2D sticking around in iMacs, for one simple reason: Price.

For the first time in a long time, Apple has strong downward pressure on its price brackets. The way the PC market has addressed this for a long time is to simply repackage older motherboards in cheap, shiny cases with cheap monitors and price it to sell. Apple is now looking at a similar strategy. They already did it with their MacBook, though to be fair they swapped in the current motherboard when they ran out of old stock.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the C2D iMac is still a perfectly good machine for a great many people. Repositioned as a budget (for Apple) machine, it will not have to have the latest and greatest because nobody will be looking for that.

I think that what we're going to see is the bifurcation of the iMac line along the lines of the MacBook/MacBook Pro bifurcation earlier this year: The current 20" iMacs with the current (or cheaper) cases and the current displays will hold the ~$1k price range. The 24" iMacs will continue to occupy the prosumer-to-professional range, with current motherboards and 8-bit LED-lit monitors and optional Blu-Ray. There may even be a bigger iMac, although given that they support second monitors I tend to doubt that.

I expect that prices on C2Ds will plunge as the new i5 and i7 lines are widely adopted, so Apple should be able to price the machines fairly aggressively.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #346 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorph View Post

I expect that prices on C2Ds will plunge as the new i5 and i7 lines are widely adopted, so Apple should be able to price the machines fairly aggressively.

When you say 'aggressively priced' what do you mean? Earlier in your post you suggest that the 20" iMac would be around $1k. That's not aggressive pricing to me, unless you mean aggressively overpriced. i5 pc systems should come in around $750-850.

C2D iMacs just don't strike me as a good value at this time. Intel have moved on to the next micro-architecture and that's where I want to be. Especially at historical Apple premium prices.
post #347 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

When you say 'aggressively priced' what do you mean? Earlier in your post you suggest that the 20" iMac would be around $1k. That's not aggressive pricing to me, unless you mean aggressively overpriced. i5 pc systems should come in around $750-850.

C2D iMacs just don't strike me as a good value at this time. Intel have moved on to the next micro-architecture and that's where I want to be. Especially at historical Apple premium prices.

Key words: "to me"

If you want a cheap Mac, there's the Mac Mini.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #348 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Key words: "to me"

If you want a cheap Mac, there's the Mac Mini.

See there's the rub. The mini isn't really cheap. And no I don't want a cheap Mac anyway.

I don't mind paying a premium for Apple products and I have many. But I want value. I don't like paying a premium when I know the components are low end.

It wasn't that way when Apple initially switched to Intel. Apple started using core duo cpus and switched to core 2 duo cpus as soon as they were available. Apple didn't even bother with pentium, celeron and other Intel low end processors.
post #349 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

See there's the rub. The mini isn't really cheap. And no I don't want a cheap Mac anyway.

I don't mind paying a premium for Apple products and I have many. But I want value. I don't like paying a premium when I know the components are low end.

It wasn't that way when Apple initially switched to Intel. Apple started using core duo cpus and switched to core 2 duo cpus as soon as they were available. Apple didn't even bother with pentium, celeron and other Intel low end processors.

Macs aren't cheap for a lot of reasons. Expensive manufacturing technologies, expensive materials. The fact that they charge less for their programs and OS (MS Windows Ultimate is usually $300, office $500). But one big reason we don't usually talk about, is service. One reason why they have such good, often award winning service, is because they put big bucks into it. Where do those big bucks come from?
post #350 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You're wrong about the power. An iMac can handle pretty much anything that an audio app can throw at it. As for video cards, neither audio nor video programs care much about that. If you're using a high end video program like Motion or other heavily GPU'd app, then you should also be able to afford a Mac Pro. The 4870 or the 285 cards are fine for that purpose, and we should be getting the new 5870 before too long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Macs aren't cheap for a lot of reasons. Expensive manufacturing technologies, expensive materials. The fact that they charge less for their programs and OS (MS Windows Ultimate is usually $300, office $500). But one big reason we don't usually talk about, is service. One reason why they have such good, often award winning service, is because they put big bucks into it. Where do those big bucks come from?

I think you hit on something there: Service. Like this...my wife's MB went belly up after I had applied the recommended 1.4 battery firmware update, which in short, rendered the logic board useless. The machine had just gone out of warranty, so the local Nepal dealer here recommended that I call Apple and talk to them. What it came down to was this: no one could tell if the firmware upgrade had ruined the logic board (9 beep sos) or it was something else tangentially. But after speaking with 2 reps bumped higher up on the food chain each time, Apple politely agreed to authorize a logic board replacement. In other words, they gave the customer the benefit of the doubt, and even though they did not legally have to, they did the repair for free. What other company on the planet would do this?!? So, in short, you have to factor in the service to the price of a computer from Apple. There is no way Sony would have helped me here
[CENTER] Small A/V Studio in Kathmandu Nepal 
[/CENTER]
Reply
[CENTER] Small A/V Studio in Kathmandu Nepal 
[/CENTER]
Reply
post #351 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

See there's the rub. The mini isn't really cheap. And no I don't want a cheap Mac anyway.

I don't mind paying a premium for Apple products and I have many. But I want value. I don't like paying a premium when I know the components are low end.

You hit the nail on the head. We pay a premium for a better computer, not a better looking case. It could be argued that this iMac has lost a little bit of value with each revision. When it was a G5, it was cutting edge. When it was one of the first core Machines, it was cutting edge. Then came the sealed ALU case and the thermal wall for laptop CPUs and its been falling further and further behind. Its a great machine if you're looking for an image or ease of use. If you're looking for a desktop, its a pretty terrible value compared to any quad core on the market. The entry level 20 and 24" are great machines for the average consumers they sell to. The last couple are competing in a market they're not well suited to.

Quote:
It wasn't that way when Apple initially switched to Intel. Apple started using core duo cpus and switched to core 2 duo cpus as soon as they were available. Apple didn't even bother with pentium, celeron and other Intel low end processors.

To be fair, many of us expected desktop and laptop chips to merge. Nobody expected TDPs and the gap between mobile and desktop CPUs to rise up this quickly again. When you're dealing in thin designs, heat is like the bogey man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Macs aren't cheap for a lot of reasons. Expensive manufacturing technologies, expensive materials. The fact that they charge less for their programs and OS (MS Windows Ultimate is usually $300, office $500). But one big reason we don't usually talk about, is service. One reason why they have such good, often award winning service, is because they put big bucks into it. Where do those big bucks come from?

That service isn't what it used to be. Now it pretty much relies on the underpaid kids who staff your nearest Apple store. A couple years ago, AppleCare would pay to have your iMac picked up express mail, at their expense, send it to their support center, and then have it waiting at your door a couple days later. Now, its your responsibility to drive to your nearest AppleStore at a time and date convenient for them, expenses for fuel and taking a day off of work are yours, you get to try to explain your conversation with that highly trained AppleCare expert to some college kid making $8/hr and after the work is done (much slower than the service center), you get take another couple hour drive to pick it up.
post #352 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

You hit the nail on the head. We pay a premium for a better computer, not a better looking case. It could be argued that this iMac has lost a little bit of value with each revision. When it was a G5, it was cutting edge. When it was one of the first core Machines, it was cutting edge. Then came the sealed ALU case and the thermal wall for laptop CPUs and its been falling further and further behind. Its a great machine if you're looking for an image or ease of use. If you're looking for a desktop, its a pretty terrible value compared to any quad core on the market. The entry level 20 and 24" are great machines for the average consumers they sell to. The last couple are competing in a market they're not well suited to.

The mistake you and others are making is that you don't do proper, or fair comparisons. You have to compare Apple's AIO's with other companies AIO's. Anything else is meaningless.

You have to compare category to category, or as they say, apples to apples, so to speak.

Since Apple doesn't compete in some markets, it's not fair to compare their products to those markets even though you want to.

You don't compare sports cars to sedans. You compare sports cars to sports cars, and sedans to sedans. If a company only makes sedans or sports cars, you don't do a cross comparison anyway.

I don't understand why some people think that's ok not to do it for other types of products, but that it's ok for computers. It's not.

Quote:
That service isn't what it used to be. Now it pretty much relies on the underpaid kids who staff your nearest Apple store. A couple years ago, AppleCare would pay to have your iMac picked up express mail, at their expense, send it to their support center, and then have it waiting at your door a couple days later. Now, its your responsibility to drive to your nearest AppleStore at a time and date convenient for them, expenses for fuel and taking a day off of work are yours, you get to try to explain your conversation with that highly trained AppleCare expert to some college kid making $8/hr and after the work is done (much slower than the service center), you get take another couple hour drive to pick it up.

Apple's service is just fine. You can make a statement otherwise if you want to think it bolsters your opinion, but it's still way up there on all surveys done anywhere. I'll take that over one opinion. You have no idea how they run their operation, what training they undergo, or what they pay their people, and please stop pretending that you do.
post #353 of 486
So there have been some interesting developments as of late. 2 Australian Forums have taken down a number of posts showing the specs of the soon to be released iMacs.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au...eplies.cfm?t=1275768

User 275907 formerly known as iNerd has been leaking info, reposted last night and now the other forums posts that he created have mysteriously disappeared as have the links in the above forum...

Summary of pertinent details

Summary of iNerd's predictions for the iMac:

26", refined to 25.5" LED backlit display
Up to 12Gb RAM, new CPU, likely to be Apple
first (Core i7 mobile)
Minor shape changes Slightly bigger then "minor" BUT not totally different
Up to 2Tb HDD
New mouse design, backlit keyboard
20" replaced with 21.5
Available BluRay

To be release on October 13th according to his now delete posts on aqua-soft.org

Can't wait,
Dave
post #354 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

When you say 'aggressively priced' what do you mean?

Aggressively priced for Apple, of course. They're not out to compete with eMachines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

i5 pc systems should come in around $750-850.

If that includes the bundled 18.5" CrapTronic monitor, that's approximately what they'll be worth. Windows applications have no elegant way to take advantage of a quad core architecture, and Windows 7 doesn't change that. Snow Leopard, of course, does.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #355 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorph View Post

Aggressively priced for Apple, of course. They're not out to compete with eMachines.



If that includes the bundled 18.5" CrapTronic monitor, that's approximately what they'll be worth. Windows applications have no elegant way to take advantage of a quad core architecture, and Windows 7 doesn't change that. Snow Leopard, of course, does.

Those are both proper points.
post #356 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by superd View Post

So there have been some interesting developments as of late. 2 Australian Forums have taken down a number of posts showing the specs of the soon to be released iMacs.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au...eplies.cfm?t=1275768

User 275907 formerly known as iNerd has been leaking info, reposted last night and now the other forums posts that he created have mysteriously disappeared as have the links in the above forum...

Summary of pertinent details

Summary of iNerd's predictions for the iMac:

26", refined to 25.5" LED backlit display
Up to 12Gb RAM, new CPU, likely to be Apple
first (Core i7 mobile)
Minor shape changes – Slightly bigger then "minor" BUT not totally different
Up to 2Tb HDD
New mouse design, backlit keyboard
20" replaced with 21.5
Available BluRay

To be release on October 13th according to his now delete posts on aqua-soft.org

Can't wait,
Dave


I wish all this would be true, I really, really do... but considering the history of iMac updates in the past 1.5 years this is almost too much to wish for. I would be happy with a quadcore, LED backlight and a decent GPU upgrade and if there's anything else on top of it... great!
post #357 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorph View Post

Windows applications have no elegant way to take advantage of a quad core architecture, and Windows 7 doesn't change that. Snow Leopard, of course, does.

Hi. New here. Could you explain this a bit further? I haven't read this before (perhaps I haven't searched the forums enough).

I'm in the process of deciding what desktop to choose, and for the first time am looking at an iMac (I'm just waiting to see what their new model will have before picking between that or going with a PC, which has always been what I've had).
Many thanks.
post #358 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by nairbsod View Post

Hi. New here. Could you explain this a bit further? I haven't read this before (perhaps I haven't searched the forums enough).

I'm in the process of deciding what desktop to choose, and for the first time am looking at an iMac (I'm just waiting to see what their new model will have before picking between that or going with a PC, which has always been what I've had).
Many thanks.

He's referring to Grand Central Dispatch. Just scroll down about midway on the page to see the details. Essentially the Operating System itself takes steps to better utilize multiple cores by breaking up processing tasks among the cores so the work is more evenly distributed. Normally the person writing and compiling the software you use must take special steps to use parallel programing/multiple threads. Snow Leopard does this for you, even if the developer didn't code or compile the program for multiple cores.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #359 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The mistake you and others are making is that you don't do proper, or fair comparisons. You have to compare Apple's AIO's with other companies AIO's. Anything else is meaningless.

You have to compare category to category, or as they say, apples to apples, so to speak.

Since Apple doesn't compete in some markets, it's not fair to compare their products to those markets even though you want to.

You don't compare sports cars to sedans. You compare sports cars to sports cars, and sedans to sedans. If a company only makes sedans or sports cars, you don't do a cross comparison anyway.

I don't understand why some people think that's ok not to do it for other types of products, but that it's ok for computers. It's not.



Apple's service is just fine. You can make a statement otherwise if you want to think it bolsters your opinion, but it's still way up there on all surveys done anywhere. I'll take that over one opinion. You have no idea how they run their operation, what training they undergo, or what they pay their people, and please stop pretending that you do.

Do you ever get tired of taking Apple's position no matter what it is? They could offer only the $999 macbook for $5000, cut out all third party software, and require you to drive to Cupertino for service and they'd still be in the right with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorph View Post

If that includes the bundled 18.5" CrapTronic monitor, that's approximately what they'll be worth. Windows applications have no elegant way to take advantage of a quad core architecture, and Windows 7 doesn't change that. Snow Leopard, of course, does.

And ironically Apple really doesn't have much that can take real advantage of Snow Leopard. Might though by the time the APIs are integrated into software though...if we're lucky. Also, the 20" iMac also has the craptonic TN display.
post #360 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorph View Post

.... Windows applications have no elegant way to take advantage of a quad core architecture, and Windows 7 doesn't change that. Snow Leopard, of course, does.

That's not true IIRC. Windows has thread pooling. I don't know if they Windows solution is as good as GCD but it exists. In fact most of the programmers at Ars down play the significance of GCD for this reason. They state that thread pooling has existed with Windows for some time and it helps some but that the major challenge is figuring out how and when to break up your code into threads. They're pretty unimpressed with GCD for the most part.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line